Question Deintegration off tree (cut-off part tree to new)

How to do a operation to cut-off part tree to new family to manage for other team and after time integrate again into main?
Is this possible or more problematic as can.. due gedcom?

Related:
www.webtrees.net/index.php/forum/9-reque...the-users-from-tress

The question is due privileges and wide tree that in future should be merged.

webtrees supports export of a clipping cart (plus ancestors? I have to look) and merging of trees. But merging individuals is a pain.

Better restrict access for editors in the first place, see webtrees.net/user/privacy/
I think with a restriction for them to have access to immediate family in 3 steps or so, they cannot see birthdays they wouldn't already know. Use the "masquerade" feature on the user section of the control panel to check this.

Remember that webtrees is made for collaborative work online. That is what you aim to do. Don't make it more complicated than needed.

Pain is small word here..

I have pain, coz users created separated familly trees, now they are ready to do "splint" I was sure about option to merge by simple individuals to connect X with X etc.. rofl..
Now combining in this way that I incremented X+1000 one familly X+2000 second family, but some members are similar, by this need de-integrate parts, more "rich" (with more media, data) is more interested, the "poor" (no media, etc.) can be cut-off from chain, but.. hm.. This is pain. This is impossible in this system.
It needs some virtual individual, then re-assign the X-ID from begin or something. In my opinion the system totally is not ready for re-connect individual and connect in other place with chains what is pain. With re-assign the X-ID I mind some "refactoring" by ID from begin and optimization from 1 to last individual X. This how should be done in future and require thinking about.

What I meeting when deleting and fixing:
www.webtrees.net/index.php/forum/9-reque...rs-from-tress#103702

I hope that can help to build new version.

Can you elaborate with "masquerade"? Can't find it as function.

BTW a error is :
dev.webtrees.net/demo-dev/tree/demo/indi...084/King-Charles-III

Warning: Private methods cannot be final as they are never overridden by other classes in /home/webtrees/dev.webtrees.net/demo-dev/vendor/nette/schema/src/Schema/Helpers.php on line 19

webtreesFUN wrote:

Can you elaborate with "masquerade"? Can't find it as function.

Control Panel - Users. It's in the drop-down menu. Image from the German manual:


Second link: Ausgeben als...

I see.. I was cached in mind by other language.

Anyway.. this feature on this system is also pain..
www.webtrees.net/index.php/forum/2-open-...ut-suggestion#103714
The concept problem..
By my opinion in database the individuals must be related in separated cols with family.
Also more sense to divide whole gedcom arguments to cols than 1 field/col with all or 1 field as contains additionaly (for easy export without individual or something). Now understanding why exist the module to edit gedcom fields as rows.. huh.
Ok..

You'll get the hang of it, eventually.

Not sure.. it's maybe out of Deintegration but Integration question. But.. If user adding multimedia and exist for this privileges as:
1. Global from tree1 - eg. all for "registered user"
2. User uploading to tree1 - eg. for "guest"

Then after merge.. tree1 to tree2 where:
3. Global from tree2 - eg. all for "guest"
4. User uploading to tree2 - eg. for "registered user"

With of privileges will be used? : )
Can user decide above the tree preference seted by admin?

Gedcom refering just file.. soo it's more a DB settings and system flags.. but.. can't find how this is used for files in DB due form (combolist option for each file) regarding `wt_media_file` (no any relation about privileges).

While merging you should be presented with a dialog to solve any conflicts in the data. So up to you.

Media objects get the privacy from connected individuals by default. One living person makes it private.

NB: I would advice against setting privacy restrictions in the media object, unless it is indeed very restricted. But then best not put it online at all.